Source confirmed
The original record and the page claim match.
DALLEAU Atelier
What we know. What remains uncertain. What a project can reasonably use.
DALLEAU Atelier translates public research into residential questions, project criteria and verification methods. Sources can be established, growing or emerging; what matters is that the original record, supported claim, evidence level and limits are clear.
Evidence at a glance
- Evidence level
- Method statement; operational status is separate from research evidence.
- Application type
- Publication governance and evidence method.
- Published or updated
- Updated 29 July 2026
- What this did not prove
- A workflow does not prove that a page, claim, project or human outcome was independently validated.
Publication policy · 29 July 2026
Rigorous enough to be useful.
Public guidance, standards pages, institutional material and peer-reviewed research may be cited once the original record and the supported claim are correctly matched. Emerging research and DALLEAU interpretations remain publishable when they are labelled and bounded.
Growing or emerging
The design, population, setting and limits remain visible.
DALLEAU view
Our interpretation is identified as ours and remains project-specific.
Specialist review
Reserved for higher-risk health, legal, cyber, life-safety, regulated or project-performance claims.
Our starting rule
A study is not a design rule.
Research becomes misleading when a result is separated from its sample, setting, exposure, outcome or limitations. A small laboratory study, a preference survey and a field study in an occupied building do not answer the same question.
- 01What question was asked?
- 02What was the study design?
- 03Who was included, and how many people or buildings were studied?
- 04Where did the study take place, and for how long?
- 05What exposure or intervention was tested?
- 06What outcome was measured?
- 07What was found?
- 08What were the limitations and possible conflicts?
- 09What did the study not prove?
- 10What, if anything, transfers to a private residence in Bali?
Public evidence levels
Evidence maturity
A page can contain more than one evidence level. Individual sections identify stronger or weaker claims where needed.
Established evidence
Supported by authoritative guidance, standards, systematic reviews or multiple converging human studies.
Growing evidence
Supported by several credible studies, but still dependent on population, setting, duration or method.
Emerging research
Promising findings with material limitations, such as small samples, short exposures or laboratory and VR settings.
Research question
A plausible question worth testing or monitoring, not a basis for a universal project rule.
Application types
What kind of statement are we making?
Official standard or guidance
A requirement, recommendation or reference published by a recognised authority or standards body.
Evidence-based recommendation
A practical interpretation supported by the current evidence base, with its limits stated.
DALLEAU project target
A project-specific target proposed for the brief, subject to site conditions, appointed specialists, commissioning and owner approval.
Site-specific finding
A documented condition observed on a project under stated conditions. It is not automatically transferable.
Project hypothesis
A question the project may test or monitor. It is not established evidence.
Global evidence, local conditions
The evidence still has to survive Bali.
A finding may be credible and still be a poor fit for a specific site or residence. Bali adds heat, humidity, intense rain, insects, corrosion, outdoor pollution, noise, mixed indoor-outdoor use, owner absence, guest turnover, power and network interruptions, and uneven maintenance capacity.
Some conclusions transfer directly. Others require site measurement, a mock-up, specialist review or seasonal verification before they become a project target.
Review follows the risk
Not every page needs the same review.
Reviewer names appear only with permission. Review does not imply endorsement by the reviewer’s employer, university, institution or professional body.
Health or human outcomes
Strong claims about sleep, cognition, physiology, health or a universal human outcome require relevant specialist review.
Regulated or safety advice
Legal, cybersecurity, life-safety and other regulated professional advice requires the relevant qualified review.
Project performance
A conclusion drawn from a real project requires the underlying measurement, scope and responsible specialist to be verified.
Endorsement or universal target
Named institutional support and project targets presented as general recommendations require explicit authority and review.
The public trust frame
Enough information to judge the page without exposing the back office.
Evidence level
Application type
Published or updated
What this did not prove
Sources
The detailed fifteen-field record remains internal. A reviewer is named only when a review actually occurred and materially helps the reader.
Five-point source test
A source is usable when the record and the sentence match.
DALLEAU does not need an author's permission to cite or summarise a public source. Permission is a separate issue when reproducing protected figures, photographs, tables or substantial text.
- 01Original record identified
- 02Title, year, population and version materially correct
- 03Claim stays within the source
- 04Evidence level or source type is clear
- 05DALLEAU interpretation is separated
The internal ledger remains a research reservoir. Only the sources actually cited on a page need to pass this test before that page is released.
Examples of original records
Standards, guidance and research remain inspectable.
These examples show the source types used across Atelier. Page-specific source sets remain on the page they support.
- CIE System for Metrology of Optical Radiation for ipRGC-Influenced Responses to Light
Established evidence. The measurement quantities and metrics used to describe stimulation of the five retinal photoreceptor types.
- WHO guidelines for indoor air quality: dampness and mould
Authoritative guidance. Prevention and remediation of persistent dampness and microbial growth.
- Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy
Authoritative guidance. Thermal comfort as an interaction between temperature, radiation, humidity, air speed, activity and clothing.
- Environmental noise guidelines for the European Region
Authoritative guidance. Source-specific environmental-noise context and the need to consider night exposure.
- IoT Device Cybersecurity Capability Core Baseline
Authoritative guidance. A starting set of device cybersecurity capabilities for IoT acquisition and integration.
- The Commissioning Process and commissioning requirements for new buildings and systems
Authoritative guidance. Commissioning from owner requirements through acceptance, documentation, training and operation.
Clear limits
What the method cannot prove.
This method cannot diagnose an individual, prove that design caused a health or human-performance outcome, turn one preference study into a universal rule, replace appointed specialists, or guarantee silence, absence of mould, comfort or system performance.
Project evidence is private by default. The Owner’s Control Report remains private. Only controlled, permissioned and redacted extracts may be published.
Illustrative concepts
Digital tools remain separate from project evidence.
Some illustrative concepts on this site are generated or enhanced using digital tools, including generative AI, under DALLEAU direction. They are labelled as illustrative concepts and are not presented as photographs of delivered work or as evidence of measured performance.
From source to project use